Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Karsten Whitson

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Round symbols for illustrating comments about the DYK nomination The following is an archived discussion of Karsten Whitson's DYK nomination. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page; such as this archived nomination"s (talk) page, the nominated article's (talk) page, or the Did you knowDYK comment symbol (talk) page. Unless there is consensus to re-open the archived discussion here. No further edits should be made to this page. See the talk page guidelines for (more) information.

The result was: promoted by  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:18, 10 March 2013 (UTC).

Karsten Whitson

[edit]
(
)

Created by Muboshgu (talk). Self nom at 20:58, 14 February 2013 (UTC).

  • . Length is just over 1600. Date and hook reference are Ok. There is no copy vio. Good to go.--Nvvchar. 08:07, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Not good to go until QPQ has been satisfied (currently says "IOU"). BlueMoonset (talk) 04:53, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I added QPQ – Muboshgu (talk) 05:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
  • QPQ now done and as noted above by Nvvchar, the article is both new enough and long enough and the hook is sourced. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 14:02, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
  • I think this hook is fairly boring, since athletes turn down lucrative contracts all the time. Isn't there something more suitable in the article?--Carabinieri (talk) 05:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
  • It's certainly not the most interesting hook I've ever proposed. It is slightly unusual for an amateur baseball player to do this, though not at all unprecedented. It's not like he was a free agent able to negotiate with any team; it was San Diego or college. Maybe a hook could include his season ending injury in 2013 which will likely cost him any chance of topping that 2.1 million? – Muboshgu (talk) 15:49, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Is he still characterized as a top prospect for the 2013 draft given this injury? I don't know myself; I didn't see anything that would refute or confirm that. EricEnfermero Howdy! 01:28, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Would adding that he went to college instead make it more interesting? Or is that also a common occurrence? BlueMoonset (talk) 01:40, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Not really. Most American pro athletes go to college before turning pro.--Carabinieri (talk) 02:57, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Even first-round draft picks? Oh well. I thought it was kind of interesting that he would have signed if the bonus had been $2.7 million rather than $2.1 million, but I don't pay much attention to sports. I thought it was smart of him to realize he wasn't ready to take on the pressure of minor league ball. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:48, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I'd like to withdraw this nom. It meets the basic DYK criteria, but not every 5x expansion or new article over 1500 needs to be promoted. I can't think of a more interesting way to package his tidbits into a good hook. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I think that's a very sensible thing to do. I wish more nominators had that kind of attitude towards DYK. Some articles are good, but just don't have a fact suitable for DYK in them. And presenting interesting factoids should be DYK's primary aim.--Carabinieri (talk) 17:09, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Some editors treat DYK as a "right" as opposed to a "privilege". Every article I create or expand I do with an eye towards DYK, but lots of them don't end up nominated for whatever reason (not enough expansion, clearly nothing interesting enough to get posted). I initially thought this one was interesting enough, "interesting" being the subjective term that it is, but the questions on that are on point and there's no reason to force anything through. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Nomination withdrawn by creator. Sorry this one didn't work out. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:54, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Eh don't worry about it. The next one will be great! – Muboshgu (talk) 01:36, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm okay with that if everyone else is. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:45, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
  • ALT hook needs a formal tick. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:37, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Have asked Carabinieri to review because of earlier issues with hooks here. BlueMoonset (talk) 05:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I don't think the new hook is great, but we've had much worse. I haven't reviewed the article, but it was approved by some other reviewer so I think it's good to go.--Carabinieri (talk) 01:48, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Karsten_Whitson&oldid=1022559229"